Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33827849›Full record

ArticleBMJ open2021

Sociodemographic differences in self-reported exposure to high fat, salt and sugar food and drink advertising: a cross-sectional analysis of 2019 UK panel data.

Amy Yau, Jean Adams, Emma J Boyland, Thomas Burgoine, Laura Cornelsen, Frank de Vocht, Matt Egan, Vanessa Er, Amelia A Lake, Karen Lock and 5 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ open, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

16 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Observational
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

15 authors.

Amy YauPopulation Health Innovation Lab, Department of Public Health, Environments & Society, London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, London, UK amy.yau@lshtm.ac.uk.ORCID 0000-0001-8889-523X
Jean AdamsCentre for Diet & Activity Research, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-5733-7830
Emma J BoylandDepartment of Psychology, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK.
Thomas BurgoineCentre for Diet & Activity Research, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK.
Laura CornelsenPopulation Health Innovation Lab, Department of Public Health, Environments & Society, London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, London, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-3769-8740
Frank de VochtPopulation Health Sciences, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK.
Matt EganDepartment of Public Health, Environments & Society, London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, London, UK.
Vanessa ErPopulation Health Innovation Lab, Department of Public Health, Environments & Society, London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, London, UK.
Amelia A LakeCentre for Public Health Research, Teesside University, Middlesbrough, UK.
Karen LockDepartment of Health Services Research & Policy, London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, London, UK.
Oliver MyttonCentre for Diet & Activity Research, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK.
Mark PetticrewDepartment of Public Health, Environments & Society, London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, London, UK.
Claire ThompsonCentre for Research in Public Health and Community Care, University of Hertfordshire, Hatfield, UK.
Martin WhiteCentre for Diet & Activity Research, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK.
Steven CumminsPopulation Health Innovation Lab, Department of Public Health, Environments & Society, London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, London, UK.

Funding

Medical Research Council MC_UU_00006/7Medical Research Council MC_UU_12015/6Medical Research Council MR/K023187/1Medical Research Council MR/K02325X/1Wellcome TrustWellcome Trust 087636/Z/08/Z
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesTo explore sociodemographic differences in exposure to advertising for foods and drinks high in fat, salt and sugar (HFSS) and whether exposure is associated with body mass index (BMI).

designCross-sectional survey.

settingUK.

participants1552 adults recruited to the Kantar Fast Moving Consumer Goods panel for London and the North of England. OUTCOME MEASURES: Self-reported advertising exposure stratified by product/service advertised (processed HFSS foods; sugary drinks; sugary cereals; sweet snacks; fast food or digital food delivery services) and advertising setting (traditional; digital; recreational; functional or transport); BMI and sociodemographic characteristics.

resultsOverall, 84.7% of participants reported exposure to HFSS advertising in the past 7 days. Participants in the middle (vs high) socioeconomic group had higher odds of overall self-reported exposure (OR 1.48; 95% CI 1.06 to 2.07). Participants in the low (vs high) socioeconomic group had higher odds of reporting exposure to advertising for three of five product categories (ORs ranging from 1.41 to 1.67), advertising for digital food delivery services (OR 1.47; 95% CI 1.05 to 2.05), traditional advertising (OR 1.44; 95% CI 1.00 to 2.08) and digital advertising (OR 1.50; 95% CI 1.06 to 2.14). Younger adults (18-34 years vs ≥65 years) had higher odds of reporting exposure to advertising for digital food delivery services (OR 2.08; 95% CI 1.20 to 3.59), digital advertising (OR 3.93; 95% CI 2.18 to 7.08) and advertising across transport networks (OR 1.96; 95% CI 1.11 to 3.48). Exposure to advertising for digital food delivery services (OR 1.40; 95% CI 1.05 to 1.88), digital advertising (OR 1.80; 95% CI 1.33 to 2.44) and advertising in recreational environments (OR 1.46; 95% CI 1.02 to 2.09) was associated with increased odds of obesity.

conclusionsExposure to less healthy product advertising was prevalent, with adults in lower socioeconomic groups and younger adults more likely to report exposure. Broader restrictions may be needed to reduce sociodemographic differences in exposure to less healthy product advertising.

Indexed as

AdvertisingTelevisionAdultCross-Sectional StudiesEnglandFoodHumansLondonSelf ReportSugarsUnited KingdomSugarsnutrition & dieteticspublic healthsocial medicine

Identifiers

PMID33827849
PMCPMC8031692

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.